G5 boot test reports and how we should prepare tests

[teroyk]

Yes, I know that it is little stupid dream that G5 can boot to Mac OS 9 ever, but...

...are there anybody even tested to boot the first G5 model with Mac OS 9 compatible AGP-card?
I think boot have to do from firewire-drive. Should machine have less than 2 GB memory?
Tester should have some skills to debug where boot stops. Or should first test machine be Xserve G5 cluster node and debug through RS-232?
Can Mac OS 9 boot without graphics-card?

BTW. I find information about IDE/SATA-card that is Mac OS 9 and also PCI-X (for G5) compatible:
http://www.macsense.com/product/storage/sua-100e.html

[IIO]

I think boot have to do from firewire-drive.

sounds the safest for now.

Should machine have less than 2 GB memory?

i´d guess no. in a G4 it is fine with 2GB istalled, it just ignores the excess.

Or should first test machine be Xserve G5 cluster node and debug through RS-232?

no idea if a console could tell more than other forms of debugging - or if a console will get any kind of output at all from a non posix OS.

but i think the cluster node would be the coolest machine of all for audio applications or as render server.

Can Mac OS 9 boot without graphics-card?

yes. though i am not sure if this does not eventually depends on the hardware, too. an intel core2duo macmini for example can not boot headless without some trickery at the dvi port. (or at least you can not set a resolution)

i dont find it back, but someone who knows more already explained somewhere that the main issue is that a G5 processor simply has a completely different type of instruction set, so that you basically would have rewrite literally everything.

[teroyk]

i dont find it back, but someone who knows more already explained somewhere that the main issue is that a G5 processor simply has a completely different type of instruction set, so that you basically would have rewrite literally everything.

Actually that cannot be true, because then any of G3/G4  Mac OSX programs cannot work in G5 (or of course in emulation they can work). There can be lot of difference and they can trapped with illegal instruction traps, but still it cannot be completely different type of instruction set.

I have to check it... ...I made fast reading "PowerPC® Microprocessor Family:The Programming Environments Manual for 32 and 64-bit Microprocessors" and I found:
"
An operating system that uses the bridge features does not take full advantage of the 64-bit implementation (for example, it can generate only 32-bit effective addresses).
An operating system that uses the 64-bit bridge architecture should observe the following:
The boot process should do the following: – ClearMSR[SF]. – Initialize the ASR, clearing ASR[V]. – Invalidate all SLB entries.
The operating system should do the following:
– Support only 32-bit applications.
– If any 64-bit instructions are used for example,to modify a PTE or a 64-bi tSPR,en sure either that exceptions cannot occur or that the exception handler saves and restores all 64 bits of the GPRs.
...
"
and some things more, that is not problem. It might be that G5 ROM-boot code start reading disks in 32-bit mode, so it might that bridge feature is default in start.

[Protools5LEGuy]

For G5 to boot Mac OS 9 there also is needed an Little Endian/ Big Endian converter/wrapper written in openfirmware or Forth or Pascal I guess.

[teroyk]

For G5 to boot Mac OS 9 there also is needed an Little Endian/ Big Endian converter/wrapper written in openfirmware or Forth or Pascal I guess.

Why? G5 is Big Endian too like almost all processor except Z80 and x86.

[Protools5LEGuy]

You can be sure that I am not an expert on the subject, but I listened somewhere that the way G3 and G4 handle "Code" is different than G5 in that Little Endian/Big Endian Game.

[Jubadub]

You can be sure that I am not an expert on the subject, but I listened somewhere that the way G3 and G4 handle "Code" is different than G5 in that Little Endian/Big Endian Game.

AFAIK, that's only for virtual machine programs, which make use of endianness switching. G5 can't switch endianness like that (which is why, at same clock speeds etc., VirtualPC is slower on G5s), but that's about it.

In regards to Instruction Set Architecture (ISA), there are no concerns, as well, as the G5 contains a superset of earlier ISA implementations of earlier PPC processors. (Not too many new functions, though.) That's what the IBM docs reveal, anyway, last I checked.

Above all, to my knowledge, the main issue with the G5 is "mere" lack of drivers. Not sure which, though. Motherboard(s)? NorthBridge? G5 CPU recognition itself (just like how OS 8.6 doesn't recognize most G4s, supposedly)?

Anyway, I'm no expert, either. But looking at how other systems (GNU/Linux, BSD, MorphOS) boot into both G4s and G5s, they might be a good start. Also, starting with earlier G5s certainly sounds much wiser than with late G5s, that's for sure.

[IIO]

funfact: if altivec stuff is run as altivec, it will run slower than on the G4 processor.

[Jubadub]

funfact: if altivec stuff is run as altivec, it will run slower than on the G4 processor.

At least in comparable configurations, yes (same clock, L2 cache etc.). Else, the G5 outperforms G4 simply due to sheer bruteness.

This means a 7448 G4 overclocked to 2.4 GHz (with some epic cooling solution) would outperform any G5 for AltiVec operations (unless if it's the Quad G5 and the app uses either 3 or 4 cores).
If only the 7448 upgrade was easy to find, and brand-new 7448s affordable...
Probably "easier" to just get OS 9 on G5s already. Then Talos.

[MacTron]

The main issues to boot Mac Os 9 into a G5 Mac are the motherboard components that Mac Os 9 has no drivers for. The U3 and PCIe just to start with ...

[darthnVader]

The main issues to boot Mac Os 9 into a G5 Mac are the motherboard components that Mac Os 9 has no drivers for. The U3 and PCIe just to start with ...

I got the nano kernel log in qemu with kvm and mac99 machine model, but things halt there.

So the G5 cpu is still and issue, likely the lack of BATT registers.

[teroyk]

The main issues to boot Mac Os 9 into a G5 Mac are the motherboard components that Mac Os 9 has no drivers for. The U3 and PCIe just to start with ...

So the G5 cpu is still and issue, likely the lack of BATT registers.

But I don't mean last G5s with PCIe. I talking about first G5s with AGP and PCI-X. Of course there isn't drivers for motherboard components or is there in something usefull its 1 MB ROM or 3 MB toolbox ROM loaded into RAM?

Oh..it just read just before that I copy paste from PowerPC® Microprocessor Family: The Programming Environments Manual for 32 and 64-bit Microprocessors 
"The bridge features do not conceal the differences in format of the page table, BAT registers, and SDR1 between 32-bit and 64-bit implementations—the operating system must be converted explicitly to use the 64-bit formats."
Good think that manual also says, when talking about BAT:s and memorymanagement: "However, if these features are not supported, attempting to execute these instructions on a 64-bit implementation causes an illegal instruction program exception." so you can catch that and make emulation.
Strange thing is that PowerPC® Microprocessor Family: The Programmer’s Reference Guide from 1995 (from PowerPC 60x age) at page 20 shows 32-bit and 64-bit BAT registers.

[IIO]

the operating system must be converted explicitly to use the 64-bit formats."

hm, and then RAM, next problem.

[teroyk]

the operating system must be converted explicitly to use the 64-bit formats."

hm, and then RAM, next problem.

Actually when using that that bridge feature then RAM isn't problem.
I think Mac OS 9 doesn't try write over 4 GB memory not even 2 GB
More problem comes using virtual memory, but we shut off it anyway.

[teroyk]

BTW. Apple Hardware Test (v2.1.0) for first G5 looks like so Mac OS 9 style:
(removed look under why)
EDIT: and nice picture when running Apple Hardware Test v.2.2.5 with Powermac G4 with 3 GB RAM:
(removed look under why)
EDIT2:  I remove links, look under why

[Protools5LEGuy]

Please, dont use direct "Hot-links" to the garden, or Knezzen will punish you.

It is cool to point to the page, but not cool to link files or pictures.

https://macintoshgarden.org/apps/apple-hardware-test-powermac-g4

[teroyk]

Anyway my point with those AHT pictures was that last G4 and first G5 is not so far away that we think, but this is not topic for that,
look this topic if you are interested in more: http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php/topic,5537.0.html

[nanopico]

I haven't done much with the G5 and OS 9 for a while, but my last attempt I was able to get it fairly far, by disabling a lot of devices in Open Firmware and booting from a CD.  If I remember correctly the point of failure I hit was hardware related as I had disabled so much there was nothing to run the system.   I also recall something with the way the G5 addresses memory even in a 32 bit mode that made OS 9 freak out.

Sorry I can't remember a lot of detail off the top of my head as this was before I had mental breakdown and before I was medicated so I do actually forget some of this stuff and what notes I had got trashed when I was pissed off one evening.    I did find a few tidbits in some backups I was reviewing a couple nights ago.

One thing I do remember for sure was that I got a little over excited about disabling devices in open firmware and almost bricked one of my G5.   I have since acquired a couple extra G5's so I guess I could start poking at this one again.

[teroyk]

I haven't done much with the G5 and OS 9 for a while, but my last attempt I was able to get it fairly far, by disabling a lot of devices in Open Firmware and booting from a CD.  If I remember correctly the point of failure I hit was hardware related as I had disabled so much there was nothing to run the system.   I also recall something with the way the G5 addresses memory even in a 32 bit mode that made OS 9 freak out.

Do you remember what G5 model it was? I am very sure that booting from CD is not the best device with G5. Firewire might be only possible boot device and that with installed OS. Do you remember how much that G5 had memory? 

[teroyk]

The Xserve G5 has a build-to-order option of an ATI RV100 64 MB RAM VGA/PCI graphics card with a VGA connector. The ATI RV100 runs at 64-bit PCI 33 or 66 MHz.

And what else has RV100-chip…ATi Radeon 7000! and that is supported in Mac OS 9!

So can somebody test can you boot Powermac G4 to Mac OS 9 with that card?
or can somebody test can you boot (at least to OSX) Powermac G5 1.6 Ghz with that card?